Blade Runner: Rick Deckard: human or replicant?

a) No Happy Ending
Blade Runner was intended to be a sort of a film noir movie, and film noirs don't end with happy-ever-after endings, because life isn't like that or rarely is like that. And the ending that the first release of Blade Runner had ended with the two driving off into the wastelands, and for it to be a Film Noire, Ridley wanted a dark side to the story of the central character, Deckard and for Ridley it made sense that Deckard could possibly have been a replicant.

The film with its part Kafka-esque, part Marlowe-esque and part Film Noire, then there;s a kind of a logic in the full circle of that kind of a dark story, it would make sense that whoever the authorities were at that particular time, perhaps it's the Tyrell corporation, and since we are talking in terms of Nexus androids, with the androids who are being hunted down as Nexus-6 models, and Rachael Tyrell as another model who doesn't know she's even a replicant, perhaps they would put a Nexus-7 or perhaps even a Nexus-8 out on the road to see how it would fair out in the environment of the outside world and that would be Deckard.

b)Slipping in the Unicorn scene
Towards the end of the Blade Runner production, Ridley was thinking about the next movie and there was a project that they were working on called Legend, which they affectionately referred to at Leg End. In terms of the unicorn scene, Ridley went out to film it as if it were for Legend and it seemed like test footage to Ivor Powell who was acting as executive producer of Blade Runner. However Ridley didn't divulge to Ivor his long term collaborator what his intentions were at the time with this scene. Perhaps Ridley had something else in mind but as far as Ivor thought "Well, we're just slipping in this little thing which is a little test" , but it turned out to be something more than just a test.

As Terry Rawling edited it in, he wanted it to work like Deckard's thoughts. So he would pick up a photograph, look at it remembering and then the viewer would see the unicorn running through the forest coming towards the viewer and right up to the camera when it would stake its head and at that moment, the shot would cut to Deckard shaking his head as if he were shaking his thoughts away and for Terry this made it such a lyrical piece and magic.

Ridley considered that it was not the unicorn in the dream that was important, it was actually the green landscape that they should be noticing, because his original thought was to never show a green landscape during the movie and the viewer would only see an urban world. So he figured that since this moment offered the pictorial opportunity of a dream, what not show a unicorn, and why in a forest, it would have been an image so out of place with the rest of the picture that if it ran for only three seconds, the audience would clearly understand it was some sort of reverie

c)Deckard as a replicant
At one stage in the Blade Runner script, they considered having Deckard turn out to be, ironically, a replicant. In fact, if you look at the film closely, especially the ending, the viewer might get some clues - some by slight innuendo - that Deckard is indeed a replicant. At the end there's a kind of confirmation that he is - at least he believes it possible. Within the context of the overall story, although it was not part of the original book, for Ridley having Deckard be a replicant would the only reasonable solution. Ridley thought very much that the innuendo was still there and noticed that the French got it immediately from the first release

d) Losing the Unicorn
What happened in the production was that he needed to put the unicorn
dream sequence in for the initial version of the movie and the others
involved in the discussion didn't want it
They were throwing away things that there were there for subtle reasons, and it all tied together in the final frames of the film when Deckard picks up the unicorn. Another scene that went was when Deckard stood behind Rachael in his apartment and Deckard is out of focus but in that shot he has a glow in his eyes which might get people to ask if he's a replicant.

They were telling Ridley, "If it doesn't mean anything, we're gonna cut it out."
Ridley said "Well, it's a
fundamental part of the story."
They replied "Well, isn't it obvious
that he's a replicant?"
Ridley then replied "No more obvious than that he's not a
replicant at the end."
In the end, it becomes a matter of choice for the viewer

e) The Point Of The Unicorn Revery
With that Unicorn sequence, when Harrison sits at his piano looking at all the photographs and wondering who these people are and what they're after, he's drinking to the point of being a bit drunk and he goes off into a state of revery about unicorns, and at the end when he comes out of his thought process, it never occurs again and then at the end of the movie when he returns to his apartment and thinks that the others have gone in there and killed her, on his way out discovers a piece of origami representing a unicorn left behind by Gaff.

In the first version of the film when Deckard finds the origami, perhaps one might assume he was thinking "Oh, so Gaff was here, and he let Rachael live." rather than "Oh my god! Am I a replicant too?"

But Ridley sees that Deckard is nodding, understanding and agreeing, when he picks up the silver unicorn realising something, in a way he glints and looks angry. Doing the job he does, reading the files that he reads on the other replicants, Deckard may have wondered at one point "Am I a human or am I a replicant?"

David Peoples saw how Ridley getting excited over the whole notion
of Gaff's origami, because it meant that Edward Olmos could leave that
unicorn sculpture behind at Deckard's apartment at the end
That would be a representation of Deckard's innermost thoughts, and what Ridley's point of view was a fully fleshed out possibility to justify the look at the end. To him it's an affirmation, Deckard nods, he agrees" "Ah hah!
Gaff was here. I've been told."

One of the layers of the film has been talking about private thoughts
and memories , so how would Gaff have known that a private thought of
Deckard was of a unicorn? That's why Deckard shook his head like that. And would Gaff represent the authorities and the higher authorities know who he is. What Gaff has said through the unicorn is "I know something you don't know,
that you should know and think no one else knows, is that you dream of
unicorns in your down time"

f)Deckard's metamorphosis into a replicant
Ridley's idea was that Deckard thought about the possibilities of himself being a replicant, but there would never be a scene where he would say it or speak it. Instead he would say with great irony, and as if he almost hated himself, when he describes to Rachel Tyrell the replicant that it's not her own inner most thoughts that she's having but Tyrell's niece, and she doesn't believe him, so he's able to describe a couple of details that he knows from her files in her head and out of that he upsets her and Ridley got a funny feeling that Deckard is quite upset with himself and that he's showing a bit of humanity there where's he clearly not happy with what he just did..

So in Ridley's eyes there's an evolution of a character who's getting interested in his quarry which is beyond consideration, since if you're a cop you can not get involved.

In PK Dick's original story, there was the idea that Deckard becoming something no better than the replicants he was hunting, so one might wonder if something of that crossed into the final idea, because as the story evolves that he gets involved in that world and he to discovers that he is a replicant.

g) Harrison's Take
Harrison Ford however was on record saying that Deckard was not a replicant. On the other hand that was when the movie came out and twenty years later he'd given up and said to Ridley " Okay mate. You win! Anything! Just put it to rest."

During the time of the making of the movie, Harrison asked Ridley whether or not he though that the character he was playing was a Replicant, and Ridley didn't give him a straight answer as if to preserve his options, which to Harrison was okay, although the unicorn origami would have been an indication that Deckard was a replicant.

Harrison thought himself that it was important that the audience be able to have a human representative on screen who was somebody that they could have an emotional understanding of. Having said that Harrison resisted the idea of being a replicant, as he supposed a replicant would.

It also seemed to him as if Ridley didn't think it was all that important but on the other hand, Ridley might have wanted Harrison to play the role that he was given as a human and that human being might have had some uncertainty about whether he was a replicant or not.

h)The Views of the other actors
Sean Young wasn't made aware of this idea about Deckard being a replicant, neither was M Emmet Walsh who played Bryant.

However Edward J Olmos who played Gaff was aware of what his character was doing with the unicorn origami to share with Deckard that he was a replicant also and perhaps was only too glad to follow the intracy of the this situation as long as it was done in a subtle way.

Rutger Hauer as much as he was aware of what Ridley wanted Deckard to be, he only saw it as on one level a mattering of emotional understanding. Indeed Deckard behaves like a replicant because he's so programmed, but ironically, the viewer, through the very actions of the replicants , would understand that it is they who are free, and on another level it seemed to be almost like a joke and that's where the unicorn came from

i) The Views Of Other Members Of The Production
Further behind the scenes, Douglas Trumbull in charge of special effects
had no idea, and the art director David Snyder only assumed he was a
human, but the concept artist Syd Mead as with the way Ridley thought,
that it was the only possible conclusion. But he thought thought that it
was because you didn't need just one more super intelligent detective
hunting these replicants down. So he thought that this is why Bryant
called him in , and so in the room, everyone apart from Deckard knew about
the fact.

Hampton Fancher the earlier script writer only talked about about how when he saw the unicorn in the director's cut, he saw it as a symbol but it didn't mean that someone should say "Oh, that shows that Deckard's a replicant." If someone thought that, then he could have thought they were wrong despite what Ridley might have said.

When Ridley came up with the concept of an origami unicorn and a full-sized one, Hampton initially rejected the concept, but when he saw the movie, he was in a way happy about how Ridley had handled it. The tin foil origami hit a lot of levels for him. It offered a question that seemed interesting to him although it resulted in an answer that he found stupid.

Source Quotes

Danny Peary: In the Novel, Deckard constantly worries he will mistakenly kill a human he thinks is a replicant.Ridley Scott:At one stage, we considered having Deckard turn out to be, ironically, a replicant.
In fact, if you look at the film closely, especially the ending, you may
get some clues - some by slight innuendo - that Deckard is indeed a
replicant. At the end there's a kind of confirmation that he is - at
least he believes it possible. Within the context of the overall story,
whether it's true or not in the book, having Deckard be a replicant is
the only reasonable solution (Omni: Screen Flights/Screen Fantasies, p302)

DECKARD (V.O.):I knew it on the roof that night. We were brothers, Roy Batty and I!
Combat models of the highest order. We had fought in wars not yet
dreamed of... in vast nightmares
still unnamed. We were the new
people... Roy and me and Rachael!
We were made for this world. It
was ours! (
Blade Runner screenplay February 23, 1981)

Narrator: And the new director's cut with its fleeting vision of a unicorn also posed a question which has become the key enigma of Blade Runner, the possibility that even its human hero is actually a product of new technology, an android dreaming of electric sheep. So is Deckard Really a replicant?

Douglas Trumball:Aha I don't know. I still don't know, that is enigma

M Emmet Walsh:No, I never thought he was a replicant, no, that's never, not in my mind

David Snyder:I think Deckard is real guy and I think he's, he's in pain for it, and he knows he's going to live a long time, like suffer

Syd
Mead:Yes, of course he is , otherwise the movie doesn't make sense, you
don't need just one more super intelligent detective you know, hunting
these people down. Erm, Bryant calls him in deliberately. He's a
replicant and they all know it except Deckard

Rutger Hauer:I know that Ridley wanted him to be but I think that's kind of like a joke, and that's where the unicorn came from. ((On the Edge of Blade Runner documentary)

Ridley Scott: When Harrison's on his piano, looking at all the
photographs and wondering who these people are and what they're after,
he's drinking, he's a bit drunk there and as he drinks, you go off into
the unicorns, so it's a revery, and that was the only reference right
there to this abstract image which is a unicorn, because at the end of
it he comes out of his thought process, and that never occurs again
until the end of the movie, because when he comes to that apartment, he
thinks he's gone in there and killed her 'cause they know where she is,
and er, when they come out, there it is, certainly a unicorn.

Ridley Scott: I think he absorbs, he thinks about the possibilities of it, yeah, but there is never a scene where he would say it or speak it, you see. Instead he would say with great irony, and as if he almost hated himself, when he describes to a replicant , it's not her inner most thoughts she's having, it's Deckard's niece, and she doesn't believe him so he's able to describe a couple of details that he knows from her files in her head and out of that he upsets her, and out of that, i get a funny feeling he's quite upset, and I think he... with himself, and I think, er, he shows a bit of humanity there where he's clearly not happy for what he just did. So gradually you have an evolution of a character who's getting interested in his quarry, which is beyond consideration. If you're, if you're a cop, you can not get involved, and er, he starts to get involved, and er, and so, essentially, you have a Humphrey Bogart film evolving in front of that world, or Sam Spade is basically the er a personification of that downward healed cop isn't he, and that's what he is.(American Institute, uploaded 2009, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BZPg1CSPSII )

Harrison Ford: There was a bit of contest between Ridley and I over whether or not Deckard, the character I played, was a, was a replicant or not, and erm, erm, Ridley preserved his options, erm and he did at the end indicate, er, er, with one little, erm, bit of origami, erm, that er, that Deckard may in fact be a replicant. From myself, I, I, I felt that it was important for the audience to have a, a human representation, on er, on screen that they could identify with, so I resisted the idea of being a replicant, I suppose, as a replicant would.(American Film Institute, uploaded 2010, https://www.youtube.com)

Harrison Ford: I was moved to ask Ridley whether or not
he thought that the character I was playing was a Replicant. Well, I never got a straight answer. Which is
okay, I guess. But I thought it was important that the audience be able
to have a human representative on screen, somebody that they could have
an emotional understanding of. Ridley didn’t think that was all that
important.(AFI event, 2013, text taken from http://www.digitalspy.co.uk)

Wired:You shot the unicorn dream sequence as part
of the original production. Why didn't you include it in either the
work print or the initial release?Scott:As I said, there was too much discussion in
the room. I wanted it. They didn't want it. I said, "Well, it's a
fundamental part of the story." And they said, "Well, isn't it obvious
that he's a replicant?" And I said, "No more obvious than that he's not a
replicant at the end." So, it's a matter of choice, isn't it?

Wired:When Deckard picks up the origami unicorn at
the end of the movie, the look on his face says to me, "Oh, so Gaff was
here, and he let Rachael live." It doesn't say, "Oh my God! Am I a
replicant, too?"Scott:No? Why is he nodding when he looks at this
silver unicorn? I'm not going to send up a balloon. Doing the job he
does, reading the files he reads on other replicants, Deckard may have
wondered at one point, "Am I human or am I a replicant?" That's in his
innermost thoughts. I'm just giving you the fully fleshed-out
possibility to justify that look at the end, where he kind of glints and
looks angry. To me, it's an affirmation. He nods, he agrees. "Ah hah!
Gaff was here. I've been told."
Wired:Harrison Ford is on record saying Deckard is not a replicant.Scott:Yeah, but that was, like, 20 years ago. He's given up now. He said, "OK, mate. You win! Anything! Just put it to rest."(http://archive.wired.com/)

Interviewer: I know that you're no longer going to be directing Blade Runner 2, do you expect the film to be addressing the ongoing debate about whether Deckard is or isn't a replicant

Ridley Scott:He is definitely a replicant

Interviewer:That's what I always thought

Christian Bale:D'you like that

Interviewer: Yes, I do, that's my, that's what I think, well I don't

Christian Bale: Did you win money? Did you win money on that?

Interviewer: I should have put a bet on it, I wish that I had now

Ridley Scott:It's a 'dugh/duck', it's a 'dugh/duck' (?). Because he picks up that unicorn, looks at it and goes "ungh woah, oh god", he is, the whole investment early on through the whole movie the origami you see was there, and said " I know something you don't know, that you should know, think no one else knows, is that you dream of unicorns, unicorns in your down time", and people go "whaaat?", see you weren't paying attention.( Entertainment: Blade Runner. 26 Nov 2014 )

Ridley Scott: I
didn't set out to make the film as a warning, I set out the film
because it was a really interesting premise, and I thought the challenge
of presenting near future was much more interesting than presenting far
future. Erm, and by definition of that, it becomes a warning.

I
think we're going to be closer than the film, I think. And there was,
what's happening around us is getting there, is escalting awfully fast. I
don't necessarily mean in terms of the, of er, replication, although
that is actually happening. I think there was actually an application
erm, to the senate three years ago of er, replication of farm animals,
erm, pig, sheep, chickens, for obviously consumption, erm, which I think
was turned down, but it's very interesting, it's like one step before,
you know.Audiences
change and er ten years is what, a cycle, and erm, I think that when it
was released ten years ago, for some strange reason, the film played in
a rather peculiar fashion. People weren't certain about it, it was only
the few, you know die hards, erm, err, or the die hard science fiction
buffs and people who could take it a little better than the average, the
average audience, attended it and enjoyed it. In other words I think it
was, fair to say open soft, but with great curiosity and great argument
and I was accused of being a manic depressive and all kinds of things
and I was saying "Guys, I see this in the street every day. You know I'm
just making a movie here"And I think what happened is with the you know, the video sales and the laser disc sales, people have
gone back to it I think, maybe like a novel, to reread the novel, and
thereby put all the elements in the film in its place, get used to it
and begin to enjoy it and I think that's what's happened

ET: What's changed in your original version. What were the differences in your original version of the one that we all saw

Ridley Scott: Um the voice over had gone completely. Both,
I think Harrison and I were both, you know, a little unhappy about
having to impose a voiceover onto an audience that works occasionally
with movies, but in this instance, I think becomes an interruption and
so you're kind of , y-you come disassociated from the movie by getting this verbal information, when you find out what he's telling you later anyway which is the whole point of making a movie. Um, the happily, happy ever
en.., ha..., you know, happy ever after ending, er, Film Noires don't
end that way, because life aint like that or is rarely like that. Er,
the ending that we have now is, well you will see what the ending is
when you see the film and also the idea, I always felt in here, the,
especially as it was a kind of, erm, fff... yeah, film noire, erm, er, I
felt that er, there should be a, you know, clearly a dark side to this,
to the story of the central character, of the Deckard character, erm, I
mean, in himself, er, and what I thought was, made sense, that this
Deckard character could possibly have been a replicant, so that's gone
back in

The
film is a little bit Kafka-esque, is a little bit Marlowe-esque, is a
little bit Film Noire, then in a way, in the tradition of that idea,
there's a kind of a logic in the full circle of that kind of dark story, is that, it would seem to make sense
that, erm the, whoever the authorities were at that particular time,
let's say the Tyrell corporation, erm, would certainly put a Nexus-7 out on the
road to see how he would fair in the, in , in, in the, in the world, in the
environment

ET:But they gave him then as they gave her, a neverending life which would make them that big different

Ridley Scott:Well she had a limited life span, as had the Roy Batty character

ET: But Roy Batty had a four year life span.

Ridley Scott:With her, we never knew.

ET: We never knew

Ridley Scott:It
was open because she was arguably the next stage, or Nexus, was she a
six or wasshe a seven. I think what would be curious to ask about the
Harrison Ford character is what he a seven or was he an eight

ET:That's what I'm asking

Ridley Scott: Yeah, that's what's, that's the question

ET: We're not going to find out from the.. (re-release?)Ridley Scott: No,
no, but you'll, you'll wonder. You'll wonder, it's clearly there, if
you watch the, even the first version, you'll won, you'll, if , if,
there's a clue when he picks up the unicorn at the end, that little
piece of origami, which was, this , the character Eddie Olmos was always leaving his little origami around everywhere, his comments on what he felt, and he left his visiting card, and there was this origami, which is the unicorn. Harrison Ford
picks it up, looks at it, it's almost like a conformation, his reaction
'cause he nods, understands and agrees. So I put something back in
earlier which will tell you, indicate that he could be.ET:But he knows who he isRidley Scott:No,
he doesn't know who he was and therefore, it's like, it's like, from
the story, I'm hoping you'll get that he's suddenly aware of the fact
that the Eddy Olmos character representing the authorities, the higher
authorities knows who he is(Entertainment Today, 1992 https://www.youtube.com/)

Edward James Olmos:Of course the ending is based on Gaff leaving at the
base of the elevator to share with Deckard the fact that he was a
replicant also.(Future Shocks)

Interviewer:Was Deckard a replicant?Sean Young:No, I don't , I don't know, because it's not like Ridley would tell me what he was telling Harrison (Future Shocks)

M. Emmet Walsh:I don't know, i don't know(Future Shocks)

Philip K Dick: The main difference between what Ridley's views this all in terms of and what I view it all in terms of is as follows: to me the replicants, or androids if you will are deplorable because they are heartless, they are completely self centred, they don't care what happens to other creatures and to me this is essentially a less than human entity for that reason. Now Ridley says he regards them as Supermen who couldn't fly. He said they are smarter than humans, they are stronger than humans and they have faster reflexes than humans. That's rather a great divergence you see. We've gone from somebody who is a simulation of the authentic human to someone who is literally superior to the authentic human. So we've we've now flipped and i said now the theme of the bookis that Rick Deckard is dehumanized in his job of tracking down the replicants and killing them. In other words, he winds up essentially like they are. And Ridley said that he regarded that as an intellectual idea and he was not interested in making an esoteric film. (Blade Runner DVD box set, Electric Dreamer, disc 4) (Dangerous Days)

Ivor Powell:Towards the end on Blade Runner I know we were thinking about the next movie. And there was this project that we were working on, which was called Legend, affectionately known as Leg End.

Ridley Scott:Behind Penn was this beautiful Black Park.About two and a half thousand acres of great, like, Robin Hood forest. And, erm, we got one of Vic's horses out there. I always believed he's gonna come out the trees, gonna gallop down towards me, gonna pass between the two trees, gonna pass right in front of the camera.That's exactly what he did. He shook his head tried to get the unicorn off, he shook his head right there so it was absolutely perfect.(Dangerous Days)

Ivor Powell:Ridley never, ever kind of divulged what was going on in his mind at that time. And I thought: "Well, we're just slipping in this little thing which is a little test." You know, unfortunately, that went on to the, you know, the Blade Runner tab for another film. But Ridley maybe did have something else in his mind. It was something more than a test. (Dangerous Days)

Terry Rawling: I wanted it to work like the thoughts of his. So he would pick up a photograph he would then start looking at it and remembering and you'd see this unicorn running through the forest, coming towards you. lt'd come right up the camera and it would shake its head. And as it shook its head, I cut to him shaking his head like shaking that thought away. And it just made it such a lyrical piece and magic.(Dangerous Days)

Terry Rawling: I remember them saying, "lf it doesn't mean anything, we're gonna cut it out."So they were throwing away things that were there for reasons. I mean, it's all tied togetherin the final frames of the film when he lifts up the unicorn the fact that they know that his thought pattern works with unicorns it's one of his memories. Another scene where he's standing behind her in his apartment and he's out of focus but you have this glow in the eyes which makes him... Could he be a Replicant? Could he be--? That was trimmed down. And all the subtleties were taken out.(Dangerous Days)

Hampton Fancher:When I saw the unicorn in the director's cut, I, I thought of it as a symbol.And that's the beauty of something that's good, I guess. You know, you could-- It's ambiguous.And my interpretation had nothing to do with: "Oh, that shows that Deckard's a replicant." I don't think that anything should show that Deckard's a replicant. If you think that, you're already wrong. You know? I mean, it says, it's just the question mark is what's interesting.The answer is stupid.(Dangerous Days)

Alan McKenzie:The screenplay of Blade Runner obviously went through many
variations. I find it interesting that one of the major deletions
survives. I find it interesting that one of the major deletions
survives, if only in part in the end sequence where Deckard finds the
origami unicorn left by Gaff. Do you regret that some of those more
intriguing aspects are no longer in the film?Ridley Scott:Yes. Did you see the version [of the script] with the unicorn?Alan McKenzie: No…
Ridley Scott: I think the idea of the unicorn was a terrific idea…Alan McKenzie:The obvious inference is that Deckard is a replicant himself.Ridley Scott: Sure. To me it’s entirely logical, particularly when you are
doing a film noire, you may as well go right through with that theme,
and the central character could in fact be what he is chasing. You could say it is corny or not corny. Something is usually only corny according to execution. There are seven stories in the world, somebody said, everything else is variation on the theme.Alan McKenzie:Did you actually shoot the sequence in the glade with the unicorn?Ridley Scott:Absolutely. It was cut into the picture, and I think it worked
wonderfully. Deckard was sitting, playing the piano rather badly
because he was drunk, and there’s a moment where he gets absorbed and
goes off a little at a tangent and we went into the shot of the unicorn
plunging out of the forest. It’s not subliminal, but it’s a brief shot.
Cut back to Deckard and there’s absolutely no reaction to that, and he
just carries on with the scene. That’s where the whole idea of the
character of Gaff with his origami figures — the chicken and the little
stick-figure man, so the origami figure of the unicorn tells you that
Gaff has been there. One of the layers of the film has been talking
about private thoughts and memories, so how would Gaff have known that a
private thought of Deckard was of a unicorn? That’s why Deckard shook
his head like that [referring to Deckard nodding his head after picking
up the paper unicorn].(Starburst No.51, November 1982, p29)

Alan McKenzie:Are you disappointed that the references to Deckard being a replicant are no longer there?Ridley Scott:The innuendo is still there. The French get it immediately! I think it’s interesting that he could be.(Starburst No.51, November 1982, p18-21) (copied and pasted from http://br-insight.com)

David Peoples: The tinfoil unicorn was definitely Ridley's idea. I remember him getting excited over the whole notion of Gaff's origami, because it meant that Edward Olmos could leave that unicorn sculpture behind at Deckard's apartment at the end.(Future Noir, hardback version, p200)

Hampton Fancher: The unicorn was definitely Ridley's, that sculpture and the full-sized one that showed up in the director's cut. I'd initially rejected that concept, you know. But when I saw the movie, I was kind of happy about how Ridley had handled it. The tin foil origami hit a lot of levels(Future Noir, hardback version, p200)

Edward J Olmos:Ridley wanted to put a shot of Harrison at his piano dreaming of a unicorn into Blade Runner. And that dream was supposed to be known by Gaff. Which is why he left the tinfoil hand behind in the first place(Future Noir, hardback version, p200-201)

Rutger Hauer: I always felt the subject of Deckard being a replicant was a matter of emotional understanding. He certainly behaves like a replicant because he's so programmed. Ironically, through their very actions, you understand that it is the replicants who are free .(Future Noir, hardback version, p201)

Edward J Olmos:There's a line I like a lot that very few people pick up on, up there on the roof. That's the one where Gaff says "You've done a man's job, sir" You know what that was supposed to be? Ambiguous. A reference to Deckard maybe being a replicant. In fact I saw one script where Gaff made this even more explicit. He said the same thing - 'You've done a man's job' - but then Gaff went on to say 'But are you a man? It's getting hard to tell around here." But I'm glad they cut that out. The line is a lot more subtle.(Future Noir, hardback version, p198-199)

Paul M Sammon:I'd like to begin with a query regarding one of
Blade Runner's biggest question marks; the 'Unicorn Scene" in the
Director's Cut, that moment in the film when Harrison Ford is slumped at
his piano and daydreaming about the mythical beast. Before we get into
that shot's thematic meanings. I'd like to ask about its origins. Was it
in any way influenced by Legend, the film you did after Blade Runner,
which also featured unicorns.Ridley Scott: No.
That unicorn was actually filmed prior to any thought of making Legend.
In fact, it was specifically shot for Blade Runner during the
post-production process. At that point in time, I was editing the
picture in England, at Pinewood Studios, and we were heading towards a
mix. Yet, I still , creatively speaking, had this blank space in my head
in regards to what Deckard's dream at the piano was going to be all
about.

That was distressing, because this was an important
moment for me. I'd predetermined that the unicorn would be the
strongest clue that Deckard, this hunter of replicants, might actually
be an artificial human himself. I did feel that the dream had to be
vague, indirect. I didn't mind if it remained a bit mysterious, either,
so that you had to think about it. Because there is a clear thread
thoughout the film that would later explain it.Anyway,
I eventually realized I had to think of an image that was so personal
it could only belong to an individual's inner thoughts. And eventually I
hit on a unicorn.(Future Noir by Paul M Sammon)(

Empire:What is the significance of the unicorn?

Ridley Scott: So much has been made by the critics of the unicorn, yet they've
actually missed the wider issue. It is not the unicorn itself which is
important. It's the landscape around it - the green landscape - they
should be noticing. My original thought had been to never show a green
landscape during Blade Runner. We would only see an urban
world. I subsequently figured, since this moment offered the pictorial
opportunity of a dream, why not show a unicorn? In a forest? An image so
out of place with the rest of the picture that if it ran for only three
seconds, the audience would clearly understand it was some sort of
reverie.

Empire: So Deckard is a replicant?

Ridley Scott: Well, in preparing the storyline, it always seemed logical to me that
in a film of paranoia, Deckard should find out he was a replicant. It
seemed proper that he might begin to wonder whether at some point the
police department hadn't done the same thing to him. So I always felt
the amusing irony about Harrison's character would be that he was, in
fact, a synthetic human. I felt it should remain hidden, except from
those who paid attention and got it.(http://www.empireonline.com/movies/features/empire-80s-month-ridley-scott-revisits-blade-runner/)